(13-02-2012 10:55 AM)N.E.OhioAtheist Wrote: Nothing was worth a damn from China. It's cheaper but not better. The steel was bad and the parts were made out of spects.

This is the fault of the buyer, not the seller. Why would a Chinese business build better quality, more expensive products when people buy the shit anyway?

You dont know what you are talking about. The company ordered a product and got substandard units, they had to go back to my brothers company to get the better product. You really are full of yourself.

(13-02-2012 11:03 AM)N.E.OhioAtheist Wrote:

(13-02-2012 10:59 AM)germanyt Wrote:

(13-02-2012 10:55 AM)N.E.OhioAtheist Wrote: Nothing was worth a damn from China. It's cheaper but not better. The steel was bad and the parts were made out of spects.

This is the fault of the buyer, not the seller. Why would a Chinese business build better quality, more expensive products when people buy the shit anyway?

You dont know what you are talking about. The company ordered a product and got substandard units, they had to go back to my brothers company to get the better product. You really are full of yourself.

By the way it is gears for the aerospace industry. It had to be perfect.

(13-02-2012 10:55 AM)N.E.OhioAtheist Wrote: Nothing was worth a damn from China. It's cheaper but not better. The steel was bad and the parts were made out of spects.

This is the fault of the buyer, not the seller. Why would a Chinese business build better quality, more expensive products when people buy the shit anyway?

You dont know what you are talking about. The company ordered a product and got substandard units, they had to go back to my brothers company to get the better product. You really are full of yourself.

(13-02-2012 11:03 AM)N.E.OhioAtheist Wrote:

(13-02-2012 10:59 AM)germanyt Wrote:

(13-02-2012 10:55 AM)N.E.OhioAtheist Wrote: Nothing was worth a damn from China. It's cheaper but not better. The steel was bad and the parts were made out of spects.

This is the fault of the buyer, not the seller. Why would a Chinese business build better quality, more expensive products when people buy the shit anyway?

You dont know what you are talking about. The company ordered a product and got substandard units, they had to go back to my brothers company to get the better product. You really are full of yourself.

By the way it is gears for the aerospace industry. It had to be perfect.

You didn't exactly explain that in your previous post. I still blame the company. Why would you knowing order aerospace parts from a Chinese company? Want better products. Buy them the first time in the US? If customers cared more about quality then Chinese companies that make crap products would be very successful would they? If my daughter needed a medical device to live do you think I'd even consider buying something from China? Even if it was half the price? Hell no! And I wouldn't buy aerospace parts from there either.

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

hmmm.... IMO, everyone in the US is rich, relatively speaking, considering the average income/wealth of citizens across the world.

I'm also a little bit unsure of whether it makes sense to work hard enough to get super rich. Why spend most of your life sitting in an office or travelling by plane to sit in many offices so you can earn money, to enjoy in a very small fraction of your time? If you work 65-70 hours a week to make $100k/year, what good is it? IMO, you'd be better off working 35 hours/week and making $50k, but enjoy life more. It's not like $10m in the bank when you die is gonna do you any good...

I'm not trying to brag or something, but this is relevant to me... I'm not at all enjoying where I'm at and would prefer San Diego, but would have to take a significant pay cut to find a job in SD, not to mention the cost of living increase that would happen in SD. Right now I'm just living a modest lifestyle and socking away money so that I might be able to use it to start a business or something in CA... Just not a good time to be job hunting, particularly in CA.

(12-02-2012 07:58 AM)free2011 Wrote: So lets look at this scientifically through evolution:

So the natural tendency of our species is to acquire as much as possible and only give it away only if it benefits them or their group/family.

Two addenda: "They" acquired by co-ordinated effort, not individually. And they didn't "give away"; the group shared. If American natives are any indication, an elder, usually female, had/has the responsibility of collecting the contributions and making sure everyone gets a share. This is a responsibility on par with the elders formulating policy, meting out justice, leading hunt and migration. In other words, an organ of tribal government.

Quote: Today we get this security with money, therefore, acquiring more assures that the person/family will survive. And giving it away without personal benefit isn't a logical survival tactic.

Unless you want to keep your stuff, your kids and your head.
Civilization - specialization, urbanization and hierarchic social structure - changed the way groups of humans interact. This new structure took natural selection out of the picture. (which may be when we began devolving) Society is no longer organized on the clan model; its members have no unifying, organic connection.
Strength, skill, courage and loyalty to the group are no longer - and have not been for several millennia - factors in social status. The new deciders are ruthlessness, deceit and the ability to attract the worst human types (bullies, shills and panderers) to one's side.
The emperor's poxy, lunatic son becomes emperor, just as the slave-trader's debauched progeny inherit his wealth and political influence; an endless chain of Poppa and Baby Docs, Kim Jongs, Bushes and Shrubs.... until the populace decides otherwise, and that doesn't happen until a good deal of the society's substance has been wasted.

Quote:I would even propose that giving to charities, which I do generously, is an evolutionary trait of emotional survival. It makes us feel valuable and needed.

Like Jesus said: After the children are fed, let the dogs have crumbs from your table.
Looking upon large segments of your own co-nationals as "other" or even non-human allows you charity in disparity. Giving makes you feel superior. And it lets you off the ethical hook of examining the mechanism of the taking; where and by what route wealth came to one person.
(Wealth is not created by the wealthy.)

Most forum participants, from habit of thought and systemic innumeracy, will immediately put this back in the small-potatoes scale. "I work hard for my wages!" or "Why shouldn't somebody who is willing to work for it have more?" (Seriously. Can you see a mine owner working a million times as hard as a miner?)
The wage-earner's level of prosperity isn't wealth and isn't being contested. This is the level at which there has never been any question of paying taxes: the government simply takes it and you have no recourse. The government - which neither you nor the objects of your charity control - will spend it on explosives for the crippling of wage-earners like you in another country, produced by wage-earners like you, for the huge profit of people who do not work at all, rarely get blown up and never get taxed.